Not to belabor this point, but a bit of historical perspective may be of
benefit and while many may not think it's any specific organization or
entity's responsibility to step up and support this work, keep in mind the
title of the Standard and why it exists.

The title is NFPA232  "Standard for the Protection of Records", and it's
purpose is to provide guidance for all entities that either store records on
behalf of themselves, or as assets for their organizations, or are
responsible for generating contractual obligations for outside service
providers to perform these duties on behalf of their organizations.

This represents the only guidance issued by an official body that addresses
fire protection and construction standards for facilities designed
specifically for this purpose.  ARMA had issued two other documents (Record
Center Operations, which is past its renewal date and the Guideline for
Evaluating Offsite Records Storage Facilities, which was based almost
entirely on NFPA 232) that have some insights on these issues.  However, if
an outside entity such as a Building Inspector or a Registered Fire
Protection Engineer are going to inspect a facility for Life and Fire
Safety, they're going to NFPA, not ARMA.

Also, as has been mentioned the proposals to make changes in this cycle
shift the responsibilities of determining the level of protection required
for assets in storage from the "Authority Having Jurisdiction" (AHJ) from
the Fire Marshal and/or Fire Protection Engineer to the owner of the
records.  In most cases, this would be the Records Managers who enters into
the contractual obligation, reviews the facility and manages the contract.

ARMA had direct representation on this Committee from 1999 until 2006, and
when the representative left ARMA and was replaced by another entity, I was
in the role of Chair of ARMA's Standards Development Committee, and I
STRONGLY suggested that instead of potentially losing the seat on the
Technical Committee, that the newly hired individual apply for membership as
soon as possible.  He was reminded on multiple occasions, as was his
replacement, and this never took place.  Because the document was between 5
year revision cycles, there would not have been any time required to support
the Standard.  I once again reminded ARMA leadership and staff in 2008 of
the need to have someone re-apply for a position to beat the next revision
cycle, but again this didn't take place.

As Hugh has mentioned during the highly contentious revisions proposed in
2005, it was the direct involvement of Diane Carlisle and Juanita Skillman
by attending the National Meeting and arguing against the proposed changes
on the floor that Fire Protection Engineers and members in attendance
overwhelmingly voted down the proposals to weaken the Standard, and it was
returned to Committee for further revisions. Over the next year, compromises
were reached which resulted in less protection than had been in the document
in the 2000 version, but a stronger Standard than had been proposed at the
National Convention.

The decision to have these individuals attend in 2005 was based on the
understanding that they represented the Professional Association whose
10,000 members were the principal consumers of the services the Standard was
designed to protect, so if ANYONE should stand up for strong protection of
records in storage, ARMA should on behalf of its members.  

I don't think anything along those lines have changed- ARMA was a strong
voice in the development of Standards related to managing records and this
was a Standard that was issued by another entity that was designed to
support all of those others. 

While I understand business models have changed, and decisions have to be
made where to expend efforts- the amount of time required (2-3 meetings once
every 5 years) and the costs associated with maintaining a strong presence
on the NFPA232 Technical Committee certainly seems like a win-win for both
ARMA and its members.

There is still time to submit an application for participation within the
current proposal cycle- NFPA reviews applications in March and the next
meeting is in October to finalize the proposals reviewed at the meetings
last week.

Larry
[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]